Ky. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 525
Kentucky Revised Statutes

Ky. Rev. Stat. § 525.020 (2026)

Riot in the first degree

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section KY-LRCapps.legislature.ky.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(1) A person is guilty of riot in the first degree when:

(a) He knowingly participates in a riot; and

(b) In the course of and as a result of such riot a person other than one (1) of the participants suffers physical injury or substantial property damage occurs.

(2) Riot in the first degree is a Class D felony. Effective: January 1, 1975 History: Created 1974 Ky. Acts ch. 406, sec. 212, effective January 1, 1975.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1987–2020 · leading case: Kareem Edwards v. Commonwealth of Kentucky, No. 2019 CA 000891 (Ky. Ct. App. Aug. 27, 2020).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Kareem Edwards v. Commonwealth of Kentucky, No. 2019 CA 000891 (Ky. Ct. App. Aug. 27, 2020). · cites it 5× “Appellant directs our attention to the commentary of KRS 525.020, which emphasizes that the actor must “knowingly” participate in a riot, and that it is not sufficient to merely demonstrate that numerous individuals engaged in similar but unrelated activities.”
Commonwealth v. Cook, 739 S.W.2d 541 (Ky. 1987). “Under KRS 525.020, a person is guilty of riot in the first degree when he knowingly participates in a riot and in the course of and as a result of the riot a person other than one of the riot participants suffers physical injury or substantial property damage occurs.”
Christopher A. Hill v. Commonwealth of Kentucky, No. 2019 SC 0571 (Ky. Oct. 26, 2020). “020(l)(b) provides that out of a single course of conduct, a defendant “may not .”
Ky. Rev. Stat. § 525.020(1): 1 case
Kareem Edwards v. Commonwealth of Kentucky, No. 2019 CA 000891 (Ky. Ct. App. Aug. 27, 2020). “Appellant directs our attention to the commentary of KRS 525.020, which emphasizes that the actor must “knowingly” participate in a riot, and that it is not sufficient to merely demonstrate that numerous individuals engaged in similar but unrelated activities.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.